THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF THIS BLOG IS TO SHARE WITH THE READER ISSUES OF HISTORICAL AND CONTEMPORARY GLOBAL SIGNIFICANCE FROM A PROGRESSIVE PERSPECTIVE.
ORDER OF MOST READERS OF THIS BLOG: USA, RUSSIA, FRANCE, UNITED KINGDOM, GERMANY, UKRAINE,CANADA, INDIA,and CHINA.

Sunday, 29 April 2018

A Forbes article entitled, “On May Day, Communism
Is A Much-Closeted Joke” proclaimed the triumph of neoliberalism and the end
of celebrating workers as follows: “Once its biggest self-celebration, May Day
now signals Mayday for global communism. Just a half century ago, it seemed
irrepressible, now communism is just reprehensible, with the relevance of a
renaissance festival. Ironically, it is the Left who most want to forget...
before the lesson behind communism's demise can be more broadly applied.”https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/04/30/on-may-day-communism-is-a-much-closeted-joke/#5e68b35c5c83

By identifying the workers struggle for social justice with the Soviet
regime, Forbes assumes that the rights of workers have no legitimacy in
the social contract, unless otherwise subsumed by the neoliberal institutional
structure. In a world of poignantly expressed “selfie” narcissistic pathology
as a manifestation of how the hegemonic culture has triumphed over humanity, collectivist
humane values are antithetical to the neoliberal status quo. The dominant
culture indoctrinates the individual toward preoccupation with self and the rejection
of the real community replaced by the virtual one where the self is itself a
commodity and where misanthropic traits are inadvertently cultivated by the
institutional structure that molds identity around material possessions as
conduits to happiness. Despite widespread neglect, abuse and financial
exploitation of the elderly in run-down nursing homes; and despite poorly
educated children are a stark reality, as the rich-poor gap and poverty is
rising amid a growing economy, the dominant culture incessantly conditions the
individual to reject the welfare of humanity, and to focus only on the self and
virtual reality of a "commoditized" world.

How has civilization degenerated to this level, just as its elites proclaim
that everything is done in the name of “progress” for all of humanity? How has
the world come to except systemic exploitation as normal within the context of
a ‘democratic’ society identified with the market economy and with labor as its
enemy? Beyond anti-unionism, a euphemism for pro-corporate-welfare capitalism,
the dominant culture is misanthropic in practice no matter what the varieties
of bourgeois liberals and conservatives proclaim, only to be contradicted by
policies detrimental to working people who are constantly distracted by
everything from nationalism, militarism, religion and all types of identity
pollical issues intended to maintain the existing unjust social order and
misanthropic culture.

Against the background of an open war on labor by capital and the state, a
war that intensified after 1945 – advent of the Cold War - and became more
openly hostile after 1980 – advent of neoliberalism - the significance of May
Day has been diminished to such a degree that even the sixty-six countries
still officially celebrating this day to honor workers, do so superficially,
with vacuous populist rhetoric while public policy points toward a different
direction. Governments pursue anti-labor policies in accordance with
neoliberalism aimed to intensify capital accumulation at any cost to society,
including wars that displace millions of people from their homes, and downward
social mobility with all its consequences from poor health to lack of education
and adequate housing.To buttress
private enterprise, which would otherwise collapse if it were not for government
and its agencies acting as conduits for income transfer from the general
population to the richest segment, the state constantly transfers income from
social programs to corporate welfare, all in the name of economic growth
synonymous with capitalist accumulation.

It is indeed ironic that the US, where May Day has its
origin, government has never celebrated this day, but instead has declared it
‘law and order day’ since Eisenhower. This is indicative of contempt for
workers by a capitalist-controlled state and the resolve to prevent labor from
demanding a voice in public policy as it did in the 19th century
when it confronted a violently hostile employer backed by the state. Today, many
Republican and Democrats openly and unapologetically acknowledge capitalist
monopoly over public policy.Mick
Mulvaney, director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, unashamedly
invited 1,300 bank executives to help him convert the agency that he heads into
a pro-banking institution, more so than it is currently, by contributing money
to politicians favoring banking deregulation and curbing consumer protection
safeguards. “We had a hierarchy in my
office in Congress. If you’re a lobbyist
who never gave us money, I didn’t talk to you. If you’re a lobbyist who gave us
money, I might talk to you.”

An honest admission of the degree to which neoliberalism has triumphed,
Mulvaney’s speech was indicative of the degree to which capital is now in an
open politically-normalized war against labor and society. This is no different
than it was in the post-Civil War era when the nascent labor movement in
America confronted the combined forces of both employers and the state in the
struggle for living wages, safety, and varieties of employer abuses of workers,
including children and women. An estimated 35,000 workers, mostly Italian and
Irish immigrants, went on strike in Chicago on May 1, 1886 in what became known as the Haymarket Massacre. They
demanded an 8-hour workday, fair wages, work safety, abolition of child labor,
and the end to labor exploitation by management in the workplace. The response
was the police striking workers and government adopting harsh measures against
any worker trying to organize in the aftermath. William J Adelman, founder of
the Illinois Labor History Society and Vice President, correctly stated: "No
single event has influenced the history of labor in Illinois, the United
States, and even the world, more than the Chicago Haymarket Affair. It began
with a rally on May 4, 1886, but the consequences are still being felt today.
Although the rally is included in American history textbooks, very few present
the event accurately or point out its significance."

As Adelman pointed out, American society is more anti-labor than many other
advanced capitalist countries, though anti-labor policies have spread globally
under neoliberalism since the 1980s. While the police are not out killing
workers as they were in the 19th and early 20th century,
the contemporary neoliberal state has adopted policies intended to crush
organized labor and silence any voice of dissent to the corporate welfare
state.As a market-based institutional
order impacting every aspect of society, including personal identity, neoliberal
corporate welfare has replaced social welfare capitalism. The neoliberal goal
is to turn the clock back to the early stages of capitalist development when
labor had no rights and the state’s role was to act as a conduit for private
capital accumulation. Although society’s institutional evolution does not
permit for a return to 19th century social conditions, the trend is
to erase as many of the vestiges of social welfare as possible in order to
accelerate capital accumulation.

Whether neoliberalism operates under the pluralist model where vestiges of
social welfare and diversity remain as part of the legal structure, or under
the populist authoritarian model intended to erase pluralism and social
welfare, the goal is capital accumulation through massive transfer of income
from labor and the middle class to the richest tiny percentage in the world. Employers
had no difficulty convincing the government to crush the labor movement in
Chicago through violent means in the 1880s or to execute a number of labor
leaders in the aftermath, thus sending a strong message to the world about the
absence of workers’ rights, civil rights, human rights and social justice. The
infamous Chicago Haymarket Massacre left a legacy of the class struggle
with reverberations around the world, exposing the myth of bourgeois democracy
as representative of anyone outside the capitalist class. Anti-union and
anti-labor policies were characteristic of the US government from Haymarket
until the Great Depression when Roosevelt cleverly broadened the labor movement
in order to co-opt if as part of the Democratic party, thus deradicalizing
workers and subordinating the class struggle to capital, in return for a social
welfare state.

Post-Vietnam War progressive opposition to the misanthropic neoliberal culture
in most countries has been co-opted by pluralist neoliberal political parties
claiming to represent all classes within the context of the existing social
order. Every identity group, from minorities, women, elderly, alternative
lifestyle, environmental groups, etc. is represented under the larger umbrella
of a pluralist political party. Similarly, the conservative to rightwing
identity groups, religious, nationalist, militarist, xenophobic, racist,
misogynist, etc. are under the umbrella of the populist/authoritarian
neoliberal political camp as in Trump’s Republican Party. The left representing
the working class – lower middle class included – has a very weak voice so
marginalized a much in the historically anti-left America as in most of the
Western World. Instead of joining the progressive leftist camp, the labor
movement is itself co-opted by the neoliberal political parties of the
pluralist or populist variety, thus society operates under a totalitarian
canopy within which the choices are between the neoliberal pluralist or the
populist pluralist parties, with variations in modalities, considering inherent
conflicts among the political and financial elites choosing different camps.

President Macron representing the pluralist neoliberal camp in France is just
as militaristic and anti-labor as Trump representing the populist neoliberal
camp in the US. Labor’s representation in these governments is non-existent.
Operating within the parliamentary system, France has an anti-capitalist
non-revolutionary party, though it has not been put to the test and it has a
very long way to go before it takes power. The myth about social welfare costs is easily disputed when considering that the US spends twice as much for corporate welfare. "The final totals are $59 billion, 3 percent of the total
federal budget, for regular welfare and $92 billion, 5 percent of the total
federal budget, for corporations. So, the government spends roughly 50% more on
corporate welfare than it does on these particular public assistance programs."https://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/corporate-welfare/corporate-vs-social-welfare/

In the neoliberal age that dominates life in all its aspects, the
development of genuine socialism seems unattainable and people become
fatalistic or apathetic. However, the contradictions of the neoliberal
establishment, the countless of contradictions in the social order will produce
the foundations of a new social order built on the ashes of the one decaying. The
declarations of the Asia-Europe People’s Forum in the last two decades point
out some of the structural problems of the neoliberal status quo, as
articulated by heads of state. However, these declarations remain mere
rhetoric, as the 11th Asia-Europe Meeting Summit of July 2016 illustrates.

Working for Inclusive, Just, and
Equal Alternatives in Asia and Europe. AEPF11 tackled strategies on major
themes or People’s Visions, representing the hopes of citizens of the two
regions. These are:

ASEM11 touches on some of the problems
without analyzing their root causes, namely, globalist neoliberal policies that
the same heads of state as signatories are pursuing.While agreeing on the interlocking nature of
the crises of capitalism, and acknowledging such crises are the cause of
greater social polarization - poverty, inequality, joblessness, and insecurity –
they are not willing to abandon the very system that gives rise to the crises. While
they readily admit that “We are
increasingly experiencing corporate capture”, whereby multinational and
national corporations structure and determine our lives and livelihoods,”
they are unwilling to do anything about it. No government is doing anything to
encourage genuine grassroots progressive movements, labor and social movements
that would become the foundation for a new social order rooted in social
justice. On the contrary, the goal is to prevent labor mobilization,
progressive social organizations, unless of course they are co-opted and
subordinate to the goals of neoliberalism. That the US does not celebrate May Day to honor workers is a reflection of the dominant culture's contempt for labor. For those countries that officially celebrate May Day while pursuing neoliberal anti-labor policies, the holiday has
been reduced to about the same level of hypocrisy as any national Independence
Day – oppression remains a reality for workers, while equality and social justice are a distant
dream.

Thursday, 12 April 2018

The
off-the-cuff remarks that Trump usually makes are based partly on his own
instincts, partly on intelligence briefings, and partly on the advice and input
he receives from multiple sources, in and outside of government. For several
years, he has been on record in opposing “regime change” and embracing a rather
curious combination of stronger military build up and neo-isolationism that
goes hand-in-hand with his approach to international trade and opposition to
multilateral commercial relations. Isolationism of course, does not preclude US
unilateral action or invoking multilateralism when the US sees it to its
advantage. His own problems with the investigation by Robert Mueller, mounting
pressures from the strong bipartisan support for military interventionism both
at home and from NATO and some Middle East countries, especially Israel and
Saudi Arabia constantly forces Trump to consider military strikes as a way of
appeasing disparate ideological, political, and of course defense industry
groups. Trump is well aware of defense operation costs to the US budget, as he
has repeatedly stated. However, he is hardly an expert on the multi-dimensional
aspects and consequences of US military action, and the people with whom he
surrounds himself are not interested in long-term consequences, only short-term
political and strategic advantage. The larger question for the US political and
defense establishment with all the corporate-funded thinks tanks advising them
is what kind of relationship do they want with Russia and what limits are they
willing to place on US military solutions, just as they expect the same of
Russia. Unfortunately, these questions give way to immediate expediency for
Trump but also to those in his cabinet and those in the State Department and
Pentagon. At the same time, the inter-agency rivalry with the CIA carrying out
its own operations simply adds another complication into the mix, especially
given Trump’s distaste for the CIA as an agency.

2. Is the US Concerned about Syria's Use of Chemical Weapons?

People
who are honest, above all with themselves if not with the public, will readily
admit that empirical evidence must be furnished by an independent, UN-led
mission to ascertain who has been using chemical weapons. Without independent
confirmation to prove incontrovertibly that indeed Syria is responsible for
using such weapons, we are left with conspiracy theories, speculation,
propaganda and inability to work for a constructive foundation for US-Russia
relations and a constructive political resolution to the Syrian civil war. If
indeed the goal of the US is to bypass such a constructive relationship and continue
with destabilization policies, then the present course is politically
acceptable. However, it has multiple consequences for all parties concerned,
including the US that in the end will be left with a larger foreign debt and
smaller regional influence in the Middle East. For its part, Russia wants to
retain Syria as a satellite to counterbalance the US-Saudi-Israeli influence.
The problem for the US is that China leans more heavily toward the Russian
position than the US. Beijing does not want US-NATO monopoly in the Middle East
any more than Russia or Iran. If indeed the US does bomb Syrian targets, as it
may in order to save face if nothing else, the goal will be a symbolic gesture
to appease militarist adventurists in the US, placate multilateral militarists
in the Western Alliance and the Middle East, and for Trump to receive a
much-needed applause from both Republicans and Democrats alike and the
mainstream media merely for demonstrating resolve and leadership because
militarism is easily equated with leadership whereas diplomacy is seen as
compromise. People who analyze foreign policy in order to promote an ideology
or as an advertisement for the defense industry want military adventurism.
Those interested in crisis-resolution know that there is no military solution
for the Syrian crisis which is complex owing to considerable foreign
intervention as well as a reflection of disparate divisions within Syria that
range from religious and tribal to socioeconomic and political. There is an
opportunity for a solution, but the only consideration for the US political,
defense and business establishment is what influence will the US have once the
negotiations are finished.

3.Russia has stated that it would shoot down US missiles fired
over Syria, can this lead to a possible US-Russia confrontation?

Russia has spent several billions in the past seven years
trying to act as a counterweight to the US and to retain the old Soviet-style
influence with Syria, while also helping to defeat ISIS. It achieved the goal,
but only with the help of Iran and late-in-the-game Turkish participation after
Erdogan's disagreement with Saudi Arabia. The uncomfortable
Moscow-Tehran-Ankara alliance to keep Syria out of US-NATO-Saudi influence
could be at risk if an all-out military confrontation erupts between US and
Russia even at the regional and very limited level. I believe that the Kremlin
has to save face as much as Trump. However, Putin will think long and hard
about how to avoid confrontation and what limits he is willing to put on the
table as negotiating leverage, even if he has to return fire at a limited
scope. Russia actually has a burden in Syria for it is not an easy thing
carrying a satellite as the US knows – just ask the people who keep track of
the costs in Iraq and Afghanistan. Despite those itching for war in the media,
Pentagon, intelligence agencies, business circles and think tanks, the US
public has no appetite for a war or destabilization that drive markets down.
The problem is finding a mutually-agreed route out the crisis, and this is an
enigma because there are many players and they disagree sharply. US-Russian
confrontation is more frightening to Americans than a confrontation with North
Korea.

4.US allies such as the UK, Australia and France have stated
that they will consider a missile strike on Syria, what can we expect from US
Western allies?

The
Syrian crisis is where the EU can play a moderating role and actually mitigate
it by demanding a political solution that does not also put at risk EU-Iranian
relations. Surprisingly Germany, instead of France or the UK that present
themselves as more progressive, could play that role partly because Germany has
more to lose but also because Berlin sees its EU economic hegemony threatened
by military adventures. The US could actually use the disagreements among NATO
members as cover for military restraint, even if that means dropping a few
bombs as show of strength and demonstration of superpower status. The nature of
the highly integrated world economy, with China pulling so many strings from
behind the scenes will help to avert a crisis. This does not mean that things
cannot get out of control as they did with the Cuban Missile Crisis, but the
world is more integrated today in it was sixty years ago. The Western Alliance
is somewhat fractured not only because of Trump’s criticism of it and his
tendency to opt for unilateral diplomacy, but also because China wields so much
economic power as the world’s number one economic power in PPP terms, while the
US remains number one in nominal GDP. The gap between rising US military power
and declining economic power, the latter which is filled by China, forces
re-alignment in practice although in theory the Western Alliance remains solid.
Countries economically dependent on China while military dependent on the US
take into account their broader interests, considering that economic power is
in itself considerable leverage on diplomacy. Because of this variable, US
military power has limitations as it is not backed by economic power as it was
under Truman and Eisenhower.

5.Do you think it’s still likely that the US troops will
withdraw from Syria in the short-term?

The US will not be withdrawing from Syria, no matter what
Trump says. Of course, there could be some quid-pro-quo. Obama promised
withdrawing from Afghanistan as well, but the US is still there in a highly
dubious mission as a symbol of super-power status and little else. The CIA
proxy war with Saudi Arabia providing financing to Syrian rebels, and Iran as a
main target to be weakened as far as the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia are
concerned, make it necessary for the US to remain in Syria in some fashion. If
one steps back from this heated crisis and examines it from a dispassionate
perspective, it may actually best serve the interests of the Syrian people to
have some US-NATO influence in Syria for the intermediate term, and Putin may
actually negotiate such a role. Not that Syria can become the modern model of
Tito's Yugoslavia, but given the circumstances, negotiating some role for the
West at least to buy time and give the people of Syria breathing room for
reconstruction and development is not a bad solution that may suit all sides.
Longer-term, who knows what happens in Syria? Just take a look at all the North
African countries that underwent uprisings and Western interventions ostensibly
to improve the lives of the people? Are the people of Egypt, Libya, Tunisia,
Morocco, or Algeria better off today than they were before the uprisings?
The tragedy is one suffered by the people of Syria who are victims, while
foreign powers position themselves to influence the regional balance of power.

"A
gripping, passion-filled, and suspenseful tale of love, betrayal,
political and religious intrigue, this novel entices the reader’s
senses and intellect beyond conventions. Slaves to Gods and Demons
takes the reader through a roller coaster enthralling journey of
personal trials and triumphs of a family emerging vanquished and
destitute after World War II.

Narrated by a young boy, Morfeos, modeled after the Greco-Roman pagan
deity of sleep and dreams, the book reveals the soul of a people trying
to ascertain and assert their identity while rebuilding their lives and
recapturing the glory of a lost civilization.

Seeking liberation from restraints of time, social conventions, and
binding traditions, the deity of dreams provides the conformist and the
free-spirited characters in the novel with venues for redemption that
are mere paths toward illusions. Exploring the complexities of human
relationships shaped by priest and politician alike, the novel rests on
the central theme that life is invariably a series of illusions, some
of which are euphoric, most horrifying, all an integral part of daily
existence.

Striving for purpose amid life’s absurdities after the destruction of
western civilization in two global wars, the characters in Slaves to
Gods and Demons struggle between holding on to the glory and grandeur of
a pagan legacy and the Christian present shaped by contemporary
secular events in Western Civilization."